ESG Reporting Is Moving From Voluntary to Mandatory: Country-Wise Timeline

ESG disclosure transformed from voluntary corporate responsibility exercise into legal compliance requirement across major economies. When is BRSR mandatory in India, CSRD timeline deadlines in Europe, uncertainty around is ESG reporting mandatory in USA, and evolving UAE ESG reporting law create complex regulatory landscapes for multinational corporations. Companies that treated sustainability reporting as optional now face enforcement deadlines, assurance obligations, and financial penalties for non-compliance.

This guide maps the shift from voluntary to mandatory ESG disclosure across key jurisdictions, tracking implementation timelines, enforcement mechanisms, and compliance implications for organizations operating globally.

The Global Shift: Why ESG Became Mandatory

Voluntary ESG reporting dominated corporate sustainability practice for decades. Companies published sustainability reports when convenient, selected favorable metrics, and avoided external verification. Investors and regulators recognized the limitations. Inconsistent methodologies prevented comparison across companies. Self-selected disclosure created information gaps on material risks. Lack of assurance enabled greenwashing without consequence.

Regulatory authorities worldwide responded by converting voluntary frameworks into legal mandates. The shift accelerated between 2020-2025 as climate commitments, investor demands, and stakeholder pressure converged. Mandatory ESG regulation now affects approximately 60,000 companies globally with that number expanding annually as more jurisdictions implement requirements and existing mandates broaden coverage.

The transition creates strategic inflection point. Companies that built voluntary reporting capabilities gain compliance advantages. Organizations treating ESG as optional face compressed timelines for infrastructure development, data collection systems, and governance structures required under mandatory frameworks.

India: BRSR Mandatory Timeline

India established one of the world's most comprehensive mandatory ESG frameworks through Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting enforced by the Securities and Exchange Board of India.

When Is BRSR Mandatory: Implementation Schedule

When is BRSR mandatory following a phased rollout beginning FY 2021-22 when SEBI allowed voluntary adoption for top 1,000 listed companies by market capitalization, replacing the previous Business Responsibility Report format. This transition year enabled companies to familiarize themselves with new structure and metrics before enforcement began.

FY 2022-23 marked the shift to mandatory compliance. When is BRSR mandatory became definitive as all top 1,000 NSE and BSE listed companies by market cap faced legal requirement to file BRSR disclosures as part of annual reports. Companies dropping below the threshold could pause reporting until re-entering the mandate, while those moving into the top 1,000 must begin immediate compliance.

The market capitalization ranking determines applicability calculated as of March 31 each year. Companies must monitor their ranking and prepare for compliance if approaching the threshold. First-time reporters receive no grace period once entering the top 1,000 list.

BRSR Core: Reasonable Assurance Rollout

SEBI introduced BRSR Core in July 2023 (via circular dated July 12, 2023), identifying Key Performance Indicators under nine ESG attributes requiring independent verification to reasonable assurance standards. This subset elevates selected metrics from self-reported disclosures to audited data comparable to financial statement assurance.

When is BRSR mandatory with reasonable assurance follows staggered implementation. FY 2023-24 required reasonable assurance for top 150 listed companies. FY 2024-25 expanded coverage to top 250 companies. FY 2025-26 reaches top 500 companies. FY 2026-27 achieves full coverage with all top 1,000 companies facing reasonable assurance requirements for BRSR Core KPIs.

The phased approach provides preparation time but companies should begin building assurance-ready processes immediately. Reasonable assurance demands rigorous evidence collection, detailed testing of data accuracy, verification of calculation methodologies, assessment of internal controls, and comprehensive audit trail documentation. Organizations cannot implement these capabilities overnight.

BRSR Enforcement and Penalties

When is BRSR mandatory carries enforcement consequences through SEBI's regulatory authority. Non-compliance or inaccurate disclosure can result in monetary penalties imposed on companies and key management personnel, trading restrictions on securities, delisting proceedings for repeated violations, and reputational damage affecting investor confidence and market valuation.

SEBI conducts surveillance of annual report filings, reviews sustainability disclosures for completeness, and investigates complaints regarding accuracy. The regulatory body has not hesitated to take action against non-compliant listed entities in other disclosure domains, establishing precedent for potential ESG enforcement.

Europe: CSRD Implementation Timeline

The European Union created the world's most comprehensive mandatory ESG framework through Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and European Sustainability Reporting Standards affecting approximately 50,000 companies.

CSRD Timeline: Phased Rollout Schedule

CSRD timeline implementation follows carefully structured phases. FY 2024 reporting year, filed in 2025, applies to large companies already subject to Non-Financial Reporting Directive. This category includes EU companies exceeding 500 employees that were previously required to publish non-financial statements. Approximately 2,000 companies entered compliance during this initial phase.

FY 2025 reporting year, filed in 2026, expands coverage to all large EU companies not previously covered. Large company definition requires exceeding two of three thresholds: 250 employees, €50 million revenue, or €25 million balance sheet total. This phase adds approximately 48,000 companies to mandatory reporting obligations.

FY 2026 reporting year, filed in 2027, includes listed SMEs excluding micro-enterprises. Listed small and medium enterprises face scaled ESRS standards with reduced disclosure requirements compared to large companies. SMEs receive optional three-year deferral, potentially postponing compliance until FY 2029 reporting year filed in 2030.

FY 2028 reporting year, filed in 2029, captures non-EU companies with substantial EU operations. Third-country companies generating over €150 million EU revenue and maintaining at least one EU subsidiary or branch must comply. This extraterritorial reach affects multinationals headquartered globally but operating significantly within European markets.

CSRD Timeline: Assurance Requirements

CSRD timeline includes progressive assurance obligations. Limited assurance applies initially for all companies, requiring independent verification at moderate confidence level similar to financial statement review procedures. Assurance providers examine plausibility of reported data without exhaustive testing.

The European Commission is required to adopt reasonable assurance standards by October 1, 2028, following a feasibility assessment. However, the transition to reasonable assurance is not yet confirmed as mandatory. The February 2025 EU Omnibus simplification proposal removes the obligation to transition from limited to reasonable assurance entirely, leaving only limited assurance requirements. Until final regulations are adopted, companies should monitor regulatory developments while building robust assurance-ready processes.

Organizations should not wait for potential reasonable assurance requirements to build audit-ready processes. Limited assurance engagements reveal control weaknesses and data quality issues that require multi-year remediation regardless of future assurance level requirements.

CSRD Timeline: Digital Reporting Mandate

CSRD timeline requires digital reporting using European Single Electronic Format from inception. All sustainability disclosures must be tagged using XBRL taxonomy enabling machine-readable data extraction. This digital-first approach differentiates CSRD from most other jurisdictions accepting PDF submissions.

The XBRL tagging requirement affects systems architecture and publication workflows. Companies need technology platforms capable of generating properly tagged output, validation tools ensuring tag accuracy, and processes maintaining consistency between human-readable reports and machine-readable data. Digital reporting infrastructure investment becomes prerequisite for compliance, not optional enhancement.

CSRD Timeline: Omnibus Simplification Proposal

In February 2025, the European Commission published the Omnibus simplification package proposing significant changes to CSRD scope and timelines. If adopted by the European Parliament and Council, these revisions would:

Delay Wave 2 (large companies) reporting from 2026 to 2028, covering FY 2027 data. Delay Wave 3 (listed SMEs) reporting from 2027 to 2029, or potentially exclude them from CSRD scope entirely. Increase the employee threshold from 250+ to 1,000+ employees for mandatory reporting. Raise non-EU company revenue threshold from €150 million to €450 million EU turnover. Remove the obligation to transition from limited to reasonable assurance, maintaining only limited assurance requirements. Eliminate sector-specific ESRS standards to reduce reporting complexity.

These proposals aim to reduce regulatory burden on approximately 80% of initially targeted companies while maintaining requirements for the largest entities with the most significant environmental and social impacts. The timelines and requirements stated throughout this guide reflect the original CSRD framework, but companies should monitor the Omnibus proposal's progress through EU legislative processes as implementation timelines may shift significantly if adopted.

United States: Uncertain Mandatory Timeline

Is ESG reporting mandatory in USA lacks straightforward answer due to fragmented federal and state approach with ongoing legal challenges delaying implementation.

SEC Climate Disclosure: Legal Uncertainty

The SEC finalized climate disclosure rules in March 2024 requiring large accelerated filers and accelerated filers to disclose Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions when material or when companies announced climate targets. Material climate-related risks and their impacts on business strategy, financial statements, and governance structures require disclosure.

Legal challenges immediately stayed implementation. Multiple lawsuits contest SEC's jurisdictional authority to mandate climate disclosure, adequacy of cost-benefit analysis, and First Amendment concerns around compelled speech. The SEC voluntarily stayed the rules in April 2024 pending judicial review. In March 2025, the SEC under the Trump administration voted to withdraw its defense of the rules, though it has not formally rescinded them. The Eighth Circuit placed the case in abeyance in September 2025, requiring the SEC to either defend the rules or proceed with formal rulemaking to rescind them. As of January 2026, the litigation remains paused with no clear resolution timeline.

Is ESG reporting mandatory in USA at federal level remains unanswerable as of 2026, with significant uncertainty about whether the rules will ever take effect. The SEC proposed phased implementation timeline before litigation. FY 2025 would require climate risk disclosures for large accelerated filers. FY 2026 would add GHG emissions reporting for large accelerated filers. FY 2027 would expand requirements to accelerated filers. FY 2029-2030 would introduce assurance obligations for Scope 1 and 2 emissions.

These deadlines hold no force while courts deliberate. Companies should monitor legal developments, prepare infrastructure regardless of uncertainty, and recognize eventual climate disclosure requirements that appear inevitable even if a specific rule faces modification or replacement.

California: State-Level Mandatory Disclosure

California enacted mandatory climate disclosure creating state-level requirements independent of federal action. SB 253 requires companies with over $1 billion total annual revenues doing business in California to disclose Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions annually. Scope 3 emissions disclosure follows one year later. CARB has proposed August 10, 2026 as the first reporting deadline for Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Third-party assurance at limited level applies from the second reporting year (2027 onwards), with reasonable assurance for Scope 1 and 2 by 2030. CARB will exercise enforcement discretion for the first year (2026), allowing companies that were not collecting emissions data as of December 2024 to submit an attestation letter instead of emissions data.

Is ESG reporting mandatory in USA answers yes at state level for California. The first Scope 1 and 2 reporting deadline is proposed for August 10, 2026 (covering FY 2025 data). Scope 3 emissions reporting begins in 2027.The California Air Resources Board received regulatory authority to implement rules and establish filing procedures.

SB 261 requires companies with over $500 million revenues doing business in California to prepare biennial climate-related financial risk reports following TCFD framework. The statutory deadline was January 1, 2026, however the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an injunction on November 18, 2025, blocking enforcement of SB 261 pending appeal. CARB issued an enforcement advisory on December 1, 2025, confirming it will not enforce the January 1, 2026 deadline while the injunction remains in place. Oral arguments were held January 9, 2026, with the final ruling pending. CARB has indicated it will provide an alternate reporting date after the appeal is resolved. Reports must cover governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets related to climate risks.

California laws face significant implementation uncertainty due to ongoing litigation. Budget constraints, administrative capacity limitations, and potential litigation create questions about enforcement timelines. However, companies meeting revenue thresholds should prepare for compliance given California's aggressive climate policy history and likelihood of eventual implementation.

Other State Initiatives

Is ESG reporting mandatory in USA varies by state with multiple jurisdictions considering legislation. New York proposed climate disclosure bills similar to California's SB 253 potentially requiring Scope 1, 2, and 3 reporting for large companies. Illinois evaluates climate disclosure requirements for corporations above certain size thresholds. Other states discuss various ESG-related mandates.

Conversely, some states passed anti-ESG legislation restricting consideration of ESG factors in investment decisions or prohibiting contracts with companies that "boycott" fossil fuel industries. This creates conflicting state-level requirements where companies face disclosure mandates in some jurisdictions and restrictions on ESG considerations in others.

The fragmented approach complicates compliance strategy for companies operating nationally. Organizations must assess applicability across all operating states, navigate conflicting requirements, and build flexible reporting systems accommodating diverse mandates.

United Arab Emirates: Exchange-Driven Mandatory Reporting

UAE ESG reporting law developed through stock exchange requirements and financial sector regulations rather than single comprehensive federal mandate.

Dubai Financial Market: Mandatory ESG Disclosure

UAE ESG reporting law became mandatory for DFM-listed companies from FY 2023. All listed entities must publish annual ESG reports following DFM ESG Reporting Guide's prescribed methodology. Reports can appear as standalone sustainability documents or integrated sections within annual reports.

DFM requires quantitative metrics across environmental categories including total energy consumption from renewable and non-renewable sources, Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions, water consumption by source, total waste generated and diversion rates, and environmental compliance incidents. Social metrics cover workforce demographics by gender and category, employee turnover rates, training hours per employee, workplace health and safety incidents, and community investment expenditure. Governance metrics include board composition and independence, board diversity across gender, nationality, and age, board committee structures, anti-corruption policies and training, and ethics program effectiveness.

DFM does not currently mandate third-party assurance but encourages voluntary verification. The exchange may introduce assurance requirements in future years following global trends toward verified ESG data.

Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange: ESG Guidance

UAE ESG reporting law on ADX implemented through comprehensive disclosure guidance published in 2019 and updated periodically. The framework requires ESG materiality assessments, structured reporting following ADX metrics guidance, annual disclosure in reports, and alignment with international standards including GRI and UN Sustainable Development Goals.

ADX requirements apply to all listed companies on the exchange. The timing parallels DFM with mandatory compliance beginning around 2023-2024 though specific enforcement approaches may vary between exchanges.

UAE Central Bank: Sustainable Finance Framework

UAE ESG reporting law for financial institutions operates through Central Bank regulations announced in 2023. Licensed banks and financial institutions must integrate ESG into risk management processes, establish ESG governance with board oversight, develop climate risk assessment capabilities, report ESG performance and risk management frameworks, and support UAE Net Zero 2050 Strategic Initiative through financing activities.

The sustainable finance framework creates sector-specific mandatory requirements for banks, insurers, and other regulated financial entities. Implementation timelines and specific disclosure formats continue developing through Central Bank guidance.

ADGM and DIFC: Financial Center Requirements

UAE ESG reporting law within Abu Dhabi Global Market and Dubai International Financial Centre operates through financial regulator guidance. ADGM published sustainability reporting guidance in 2022 requiring regulated financial services firms and listed issuers to report following international standards including TCFD, GRI, and SASB. DIFC's Dubai Financial Services Authority issued parallel ESG guidance for regulated firms.

These frameworks create mandatory expectations for entities operating within financial free zones. While some elements remain "comply or explain" rather than strict mandates, regulatory and investor pressure creates de facto compliance requirements for most firms.

United Kingdom: TCFD Mandatory Disclosure

The UK developed post-Brexit ESG framework maintaining international alignment while establishing independent requirements.

UK TCFD Timeline

UK companies face mandatory TCFD-aligned disclosure through phased implementation beginning April 2022. Premium-listed commercial companies must report climate information following TCFD recommendations in annual reports. Large private companies exceeding two of three thresholds – 500 employees, £500 million turnover, or £500 million balance sheet total – face requirements from accounting periods beginning on or after April 6, 2022.

Listed companies on any UK-regulated market must comply with FCA Listing Rules requiring TCFD reporting. Asset managers, life insurers, and FCA-authorized pension schemes have TCFD obligations under separate regulations with similar timelines.

The UK government consulted on broader sustainability reporting requirements potentially adopting ISSB standards or maintaining separate UK framework. Companies operating in UK should monitor regulatory developments as requirements may expand beyond climate to comprehensive ESG topics in coming years.

China: Sector-Specific Mandatory Reporting

China implemented environmental information disclosure requirements for listed companies and high-pollution industries though comprehensive ESG mandates remain limited compared to Western markets.

China ESG Timeline

Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges require environmental disclosure from companies in heavily polluting industries effective from recent years. Listed companies must disclose environmental protection investments, pollutant discharge information, environmental penalties, and environmental management systems.

Social responsibility reports remain encouraged but not universally mandatory except for specific company categories. The China Securities Regulatory Commission issued guidance encouraging ESG disclosure while stopping short of comprehensive mandatory requirements comparable to EU or India frameworks.

Green finance guidelines from People's Bank of China and banking regulators require financial institutions to assess environmental and climate risks in lending and investment decisions. These sector-specific rules create mandatory requirements for financial services.

China's regulatory trajectory points toward expanded mandatory disclosure as the country pursues carbon neutrality targets by 2060. Companies should anticipate growing requirements particularly for state-owned enterprises and large listed companies.

Singapore: Climate Reporting Mandate

Singapore Exchange implemented mandatory climate reporting with pathway toward comprehensive ESG disclosure.

Singapore ESG Timeline

All SGX-listed companies must provide climate reporting covering governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets aligning with TCFD recommendations. Reporting began on comply-or-explain basis with mandatory compliance by FY 2022 for all listed entities regardless of size.

Companies have flexibility choosing baseline year and reporting boundaries but must explain choices and maintain consistency. SGX encourages broader sustainability reporting beyond climate using GRI Standards or equivalent frameworks though comprehensive disclosure remains voluntary except climate requirements.

The exchange published sustainability reporting guide covering environmental, social, and governance topics. Singapore's financial regulator indicated potential for expanded mandatory requirements following international developments.

Japan: Corporate Governance Code Requirements

Japan promotes ESG disclosure through corporate governance code revisions combining soft law with strong institutional pressure.

Japan ESG Timeline

Prime Market listed companies on Tokyo Stock Exchange should disclose climate-related information following TCFD or equivalent frameworks under Corporate Governance Code revisions effective from recent years. All listed companies should consider sustainability including ESG factors in management strategies.

The "comply or explain" approach technically allows non-compliance with explanation. However, institutional investor expectations and stock exchange pressure create de facto mandatory compliance for most Prime Market companies. Japan leads globally in TCFD adoption rates despite voluntary framework status.

Stewardship Code requirements for institutional investors create investment chain pressure where investors must consider sustainability factors, cascading ESG disclosure expectations to portfolio companies even absent explicit regulatory mandates.

Australia: Climate Disclosure Development

Australia moved toward mandatory climate disclosure following international trends with phased implementation beginning.

Australia ESG Timeline

The Australian Accounting Standards Board developed Australian Sustainability Reporting Standards based on ISSB standards IFRS S1 and IFRS S2. Large companies and financial institutions will face mandatory climate disclosure requirements covering governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets.

Phased implementation planned to begin with largest entities during 2024-2025, expanding to smaller companies over subsequent years. The regulatory framework aligns Australia with international standards through ISSB adoption while creating jurisdiction-specific implementation pathway.

Companies should monitor AASB developments and prepare for compliance as timelines solidify.

Canada: ISSB Standards Adoption

Canada proposed mandatory climate disclosure using ISSB framework.

Canada ESG Timeline

Canadian securities regulators consulted on climate disclosure requirements based on IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 in 2023-2024. The proposed framework would require public companies to report governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics related to sustainability and climate risks and opportunities.

Implementation timeline anticipated to follow phased approach with largest companies reporting first, potentially beginning 2025-2026. The ISSB standards adoption positions Canada within global convergence trend toward common baseline for sustainability disclosure.

Comparison: Mandatory vs Voluntary Across Regions

The regulatory landscape breaks down across mandatory disclosure where India's BRSR requires top 1,000 listed companies beginning FY 2022-23 with BRSR Core reasonable assurance phasing in through FY 2026-27. EU CSRD mandates approximately 50,000 companies from FY 2024 through FY 2028 depending on category with reasonable assurance from 2028. California SB 253 and SB 261 require companies above revenue thresholds from FY 2026-2027. UK requires TCFD for large companies and listed entities from 2022. Singapore mandates climate disclosure for all SGX-listed companies from FY 2022. UAE requires ESG reporting for DFM and ADX-listed companies from FY 2023.

Voluntary but expected frameworks include US federal where SEC rules face legal challenges creating uncertainty but eventual climate disclosure appears likely. Japan operates through Corporate Governance Code "comply or explain" approach with strong institutional pressure creating de facto compliance. China encourages ESG disclosure through guidance while mandatory requirements remain sector-specific. Australia, Canada, and others are developing mandatory frameworks with implementation timelines still emerging.

Pure voluntary approaches persist in many emerging markets and smaller economies though the trend clearly moves toward mandatory disclosure as regulatory capacity develops and international pressure intensifies.

Strategic Implications of Mandatory Transition

Compliance Infrastructure Requirements

The shift from voluntary to mandatory reporting demands infrastructure investments voluntary programs could delay. Mandatory frameworks require centralized data collection systems aggregating information from multiple business units, facilities, and functions. Automated calculation platforms handle GHG emissions math following GHG Protocol, intensity metrics, and aggregations without manual spreadsheet errors. Control environments with validation processes, approval workflows, and segregation of duties support assurance requirements. Audit trail documentation maintains source records, calculation methodologies, and evidence for external verification. Governance structures establish board oversight, management accountability, and cross-functional coordination.

Companies treating ESG as optional avoided these investments. Mandatory compliance eliminates that choice. Organizations face compressed timelines building capabilities required under enforcement deadlines.

Assurance Readiness Demands

Reasonable assurance requirements appearing across jurisdictions demand evidence standards comparable to financial audits. Companies must maintain source documentation including utility bills, fuel receipts, payroll records, and compliance certificates. Documented methodologies explain calculation approaches, emission factor selections, boundary definitions, and assumption rationale. Policy implementation evidence demonstrates training completion, meeting minutes, approval records, and monitoring activities. Narrative explanations justify year-over-year changes, anomalies, and performance trends.

The reasonable assurance preparation requires multi-year effort. Control weaknesses identified during initial limited assurance engagements need remediation cycles. Data quality issues discovered through verification require process improvements upstream. Organizations should begin assurance readiness work immediately rather than waiting for reasonable assurance deadlines.

Multi-Jurisdiction Navigation

Companies operating globally face overlapping mandatory requirements with different scopes, metrics, and timelines. Strategic approaches include mapping all applicable jurisdictions identifying which regulations apply based on listings, subsidiaries, revenue thresholds, and operational presence. Highest common denominator compliance adopts most comprehensive requirement satisfying multiple jurisdictions simultaneously, such as EU double materiality covering financial materiality required elsewhere or Scope 3 calculation for California satisfying partial disclosure obligations in other markets.

Centralized data infrastructure enables single collection feeding multiple framework outputs through tagging to jurisdiction-specific templates. Unified governance coordinates compliance across regions with board oversight spanning all applicable requirements. Regulatory monitoring tracks developments across operating jurisdictions with alerts for emerging mandates.

Technology Platform Requirements

Manual spreadsheet-based ESG reporting breaks down under mandatory frameworks' data volume, control requirements, and assurance demands. Purpose-built platforms provide multi-framework mapping handling BRSR, CSRD, SEC, TCFD, and other requirements simultaneously. GHG emissions automation calculates Scope 1, 2, and 3 following GHG Protocol with jurisdiction-appropriate emission factors. Assurance management maintains audit trails and evidence repositories supporting verification. Regulatory tracking monitors changing requirements across jurisdictions with compliance calendars. Collaboration workflows enable distributed data collection with role-based access and approval chains.

Breathe ESG supports mandatory compliance across jurisdictions through comprehensive framework coverage with pre-configured templates for BRSR, CSRD, SEC, TCFD, and regional requirements. The platform provides automated emissions calculations aligned with GHG Protocol using region-specific factors. Multi-jurisdiction reporting generates required outputs across operating regions from centralized data. INARA AI engine validates data, autofills information, and detects anomalies improving accuracy. Assurance-ready documentation creates audit trails meeting both limited and reasonable assurance standards. Organizations using BreatheESG reduce compliance preparation time by 50%+ while improving data quality for regulatory filing and stakeholder communication.

Preparing for Mandatory Compliance

Companies facing near-term deadlines or anticipating future mandates should assess applicability across operating jurisdictions identifying which frameworks apply and when deadlines occur. Prioritize by earliest mandatory dates focusing infrastructure investment toward imminent compliance while building systems serving multiple frameworks. Establish governance assigning board committee oversight, management accountability, and cross-functional coordination. Build data infrastructure deploying centralized platforms collecting environmental, social, and governance metrics. Calculate GHG emissions quantifying Scope 1, 2, and material Scope 3 following GHG Protocol methodology. Prepare for assurance building documentation practices, control environments, and evidence management supporting verification. Monitor developments tracking regulatory changes, court proceedings, and implementation guidance across jurisdictions.

When is BRSR mandatory became definitive in FY 2022-23 for India. CSRD timeline phases from FY 2024 through FY 2028 for Europe. Is ESG reporting mandatory in USA remains uncertain federally but California mandates begin FY 2026-2027. UAE ESG reporting law took effect FY 2023 for listed companies. The global trajectory moves decisively toward mandatory disclosure. Organizations treating ESG reporting as optional face compressed timelines, compliance risk, and competitive disadvantages as peers build capabilities enabling strategic insights alongside regulatory compliance. Companies establishing robust ESG infrastructure now gain operational visibility, stakeholder confidence, and positioning for expanding requirements across regions.

‍